Evra accuses Suarez of racism

[ngogswilly]

Good balanced article from Bascombe, going to be relying on the likes of him and the 2 Tony's and Rory Smith now to at least give fair and balanced coverage of this.

 

It's going to be a lonely battle for them all though.

[Guest San Don]

Luis Suarez's club Liverpool angry that striker's evidence counted for so little

 

“You’ve got your black hat on ready to hang him already,” Kenny Dalglish had claimed when asked about his view on a potential Luis Suárez suspension.

 

 

 

By Chris Bascombe

 

9:06PM GMT 20 Dec 2011

20 Comments

 

 

The Liverpool manager thought he was being ironic. When the jaw-dropping eight-game ban was announced, Dalglish will have felt it was the most brutal character assassination of a player in the history of English football.

 

Suárez came to the Premier League to restore his name after a series of misdemeanours abroad. His hopes of rehabilitating an already battered image could not have been dealt a more shattering thump.

 

He will pay a heavy price for being found guilty of racially abusing Patrice Evra, far beyond the £40,000 fine by the Football Association.

 

At Anfield, the findings of the independent disciplinary panel have been greeted with disdain. They will consider an appeal, but Dalglish’s problem is how to replace his star player during a pivotal period, should any appeal fail.

 

He will take his side to Wigan on Wednesday night still able to select the Uruguayan unless Liverpool decide to rule out an appeal, in which case the manager will also have to do without Suárez against Blackburn, Newcastle, Manchester City (twice), Oldham, Stoke and Bolton.

 

Related Articles

 

 

 

• Suarez never far from controversy
  06 Dec 2011
  
• Suárez was exceptional given his 'bad week'
  19 Dec 2011
  
• Right to delay Suarez verdict
  16 Dec 2011
  
• Luis Suárez-Patrice Evra decision on Tuesday
  16 Dec 2011
  
• 'Calling Evra negro is like calling Kuyt a blond'
  15 Dec 2011
  

 

Suárez will then return for the second leg of the Carling Cup semi-final on Jan 25, after a month without football.

It is the broader implication of being found guilty of an insidious charge which will cause the most distress. What Liverpool are asking today is how, after five days of deliberations, the disciplinary panel can sincerely argue they are 100 per cent certain of Suárez’s guilt?

The guidance usually given to jurors dealing with a particularly emotive case is to reach a conclusion ‘beyond reasonable doubt’.

The argument at Anfield will be that so complex, so ambiguous and so lacking in clarity is the basis for stating that the use of the word ‘Negro’ in this context is racist, the result could never be absolutely sure.

Indeed, by delaying their ruling by five days, Liverpool will feel the disciplinary panel have proven the extent to which reasonable doubt does exist and have thus undermined their own findings.

A Liverpool statement last night pointed out that Suárez had referred to Evra as a ‘Negro’ in response to being identified and addressed by his own nationality, South American. The philosophical arguments about whether this constitutes racism could last for years.

Suárez is unlikely to accept being branded in such a way. There are some at Liverpool who believe a defamation suit wouldn’t be a disproportionate response to the judgment.

Suárez will feel aggrieved that the damage has been inflicted upon him by outside forces from a foreign land, with no understanding of his personality, his upbringing or his culture. There are some who fear he may decide to move elsewhere, so strong is his sense of persecution.

Liverpool also argued that the main source of evidence on Evra’s behalf was from Suárez himself. Had he pleaded the ‘Fifth Amendment’ and kept silent when asked for his initial observations, the FA would have faced a case of one player’s word against another. Very hard to investigate, let alone prove.

Instead, Suárez chose to be candid and thus became his own accuser as much as Evra, who had no witnesses and nothing to back up his claim of being abused 10 times.

The willingness to accept this verdict will be based on tribalism. Manchester United supporters will celebrate the validation of their defender’s claims, rival fans will feel they’ve been given an open goal to abuse Suárez wherever he plays in his Premier League career, and the Kop will refuse to recognise the moral authority of the panel.

Relations between Liverpool and Manchester United, already tense during times of truce, will now be at a point where all diplomatic relations are suspended.

Dalglish will feel the sleight of hand of Sir Alex Ferguson all over his striker’s problems. He’ll believe Ferguson’s withering remarks about Suárez’s on-field conduct are at the core of his striker’s blemished image.

Liverpool’s American owners, who have stood by Suárez throughout the saga, will also recognise that the desire to clear his name goes far beyond the jurisdiction of the FA.

For Suárez and Liverpool, it is inconceivable they can do anything but continue to defend their man.

Dalglish may have to cope over Christmas and New Year without him, but he won’t renounce the striker and nor will Liverpool’s supporters.

You can be sure it will be Suárez’s name that is chanted with most verve from the away end at the DW Stadium on Wednesday night.

 

 

For all the shit bascombe gets from some on here, that is a balanced article unlike the ones from emily nugent's lad and shithead maddock.

[SCOUSE TAPAS]

.

[xerxes]

Not bother what that cunt does.

 

You should. If there is evidence that Luis offered racial abuse, that is a criminal offence, so why doesn’t he pursue it? If he didn’t, why have the FA allowed him to be tainted thus? (The detailed judgement may provide an answer).

 

How can he sue for defamation when the FA's own investigation albeit via an 'independent' panel have found him guilty?

 

In any event, legal proceedings are very expensive. He'd have to prove he'd been defamed in a court. I'd like to see how you suggest he does that given the panel's decision!

 

The FA’s judgement has no legal standing in a court of law as to whether he committed the criminal act of racial abuse. If Luis can demonstrate that the FA’s judgement has defamed him by labelling him a racist, when there is insufficient evidence to substantiate that claim, he wins.

 

 

Are you for fucking real!? So you're going to take the mirror's word? And do you seriously think united would have allowed their players to speak to us when one of their players had made the complaint? Have a fucking word with yourself.

 

I am not taking anyone’s word. I am simply identifying the questions which will be asked. What questions did the Club ask of Luis, the other players, and the referee? What efforts were made to ascertain the detail of the Manc’s complaint? How did the two match up? What efforts were made to diffuse this short of a formal complaint to the FA? You can be certain that they are the questions which FSG will ask. It may well be that we did all we could, that does not mean that the questions should not be asked. Ian Ayres is going to be a busy man. FSG have a brand to protect.

 

You're trying to make yourself sound like a barrister but it doesnt wash.You need to enrol in law school.

I don’t need to. We retain them, and I have been chatting to one, a fellow Red, this evening.

[Brownie]

I'm confused. That article from Bascombe states clearly that Suarez called Evra a 'negro'. Liverpool's statement seems to suggest there was no evidence. Why would they suggest that if Suarez owned up to saying it?

 

It doesn't make any sense.

[Guest San Don]

You should. If there is evidence that Luis offered racial abuse, that is a criminal offence, so why doesn’t he pursue it? If he didn’t, why have the FA allowed him to be tainted thus? (The detailed judgement may provide an answer).

 

 

 

The FA’s judgement has no legal standing in a court of law as to whether he committed the criminal act of racial abuse. If Luis can demonstrate that the FA’s judgement has defamed him by labelling him a racist, when there is insufficient evidence to substantiate that claim, he wins.

 

 

 

 

I am not taking anyone’s word. I am simply identifying the questions which will be asked. What questions did the Club ask of Luis, the other players, and the referee? What efforts were made to ascertain the detail of the Manc’s complaint? How did the two match up? What efforts were made to diffuse this short of a formal complaint to the FA? You can be certain that they are the questions which FSG will ask. It may well be that we did all we could, that does not mean that the questions should not be asked. Ian Ayres is going to be a busy man. FSG have a brand to protect.

 

 

I don’t need to. We retain them, and I have been chatting to one, a fellow Red, this evening.

 

 

You're talking shit. He could only prove the FA panel defamed him if he could prove they were malicious in basis their judgement.

 

No one is taking notice of your 'if this that, if not why not' shit.

 

Goodnight.

[Guest San Don]

I'm confused. That article from Bascombe states clearly that Suarez called Evra a 'negro'. Liverpool's statement seems to suggest there was no evidence. Why would they suggest that if Suarez owned up to saying it?

 

It doesn't make any sense.

 

As I understand it, Suarez has admitted he had an exchange with evra during the game. evra called him 'south american' to which Suarez has admitted replying 'porque negrito?'

 

The 'negro' bit is where the spanish to english translation comes into play. Im not aware Suarez used the word 'negro' and instead only used 'negrito' as part of a statement \ question.

[ngogswilly]

As I understand it, Suarez has admitted he had an exchange with evra during the game. evra called him 'south american' to which Suarez has admitted replying 'porque negrito?'

 

The 'negro' bit is where the spanish to english translation comes into play. Im not aware Suarez used the word 'negro' and instead only used 'negrito' as part of a statement \ question.

 

Yeah thatd be my guess on how it went down just from all the conflicting shit thats out there.

[torahboy]

I don't know how appropriate it may be but could anybody with a legal grounding advise if the ruling known as 'Wednesbury Unreasonable' could be applied against the FA's ruling?

[Randy Marsh]

Reading Facebook and Twitter tonight, the damage is done. His reputation is in tatters now whatever happens, make no mistake about it. 99% of people outside of the club will not read our statement, will not know any details behind the case other than his guilty verdict. He is fucked now. We need to chant his name louder than ever tomorrow. I seriously think we should fuck off the FA Cup in protest. Make a worldwide statement, there's no way Liverpool Football Club would do that for a guilty man.

[Randy Marsh]

DannyFullbrook Danny Fullbrook

Typical head in the sand, chip on the shoulder and lack of leadership from #LFC over Suarez racism

 

Some no mark cunt at the Daily Star, whose readership sadly represents a large proportion of our country.

[ngogswilly]

A week ago I thought fucking the FA Cup off would be madness.

 

Tonight I almost think fuck it, why not.

 

If even we don't do that, we just be royal pains in the ass for the FA from here on in. We should make a concerted effort to fuck them about as much as humanly possible.

[SCOUSE TAPAS]

Correct. The groundsman is clearly photograpgh throwing a punch at evra and it is in and around this part that the cunt alleged he was racially abused.

It was the scum subs on there warm down and it was Phelan who reported the racist remark along with another.

 

It was Phelan and others who claimed the racist remarks.

 

This is the FA conclusion to the matter.

 

 

38. It is after the first altercation between Mr Bethell and Mr Evra that Mr Bethell is alleged to have shouted at Mr Evra "I'll ******* have you, you ******* 12 immigrant" – an allegation which Mr Bethell has consistently and vehemently denied.

 

39. The two witnesses who say they heard those words directed by Mr Bethell at Mr Evra are the Manchester United first team coach Mr Mike Phelan and the goalkeeping coach Mr Richard Hartis.

 

40. There is some confusion and inconsistency in their placing of the alleged racist insult. We should not have expected complete detailed accuracy and consistency in witnesses' recollections of a fast-moving disorderly series of events. However, there are aspects of the evidence of Mr Phelan and Mr Hartis which raise serious questions about the reliability of their claims about the racist remark.

Read more: The Football Association v (1) Patrice Evra (2) Chelsea Football Club | Mail Online

[ngogswilly]

Another thing about all this.

 

In their twisted logic since they think they can prove Suarez said something offensive, Evra said he said it 10 times.

 

I know Evra only said that to the French TV crew as far as I'm aware but surely him running to them and lieing about another player is breaking some sort of rule.

 

Like basically if they are willing to charge Luis on a whole pile of flimsy shit why not go after Evra for that, or calling Luis a "South American" in an offensive manner

[xerxes]

Apologies in advance for the length of this post but really want to get it off my chest...etc...........

Finally, there is no possibility of Suarez launching an action in defamation against the FA on foot of this decision as the Commission’s findings are protected by the doctrine of qualified privilege and he would need to establish that the Commission acted maliciously in the legal sense - please trust me when I say this is not a realistic possibility as the explanation is far too long and boring!!

 

A good post overall.

 

I wholly agree with points one and two in your full post.

 

I disagree with your final paragraph in advance of seeing the adjudication in detail. You are right to identify what the burden of proof might be, and how demanding a test that might represent. But there are circumstances in which a defamation claim could be successfuly mounted.

 

I acknowledge the view that the delay in first announcing the verdict, and then making the evidence on which the adjudication was based public, will almost certainly be to shut off, as much as is practicably possible, any counter-claim.

 

FSG would not be pleased to be faced with a scenario of a club player being tainted as racist, and the club and management team, having backed the player, being tainted too.This could get very unpleasant with some fine reputations to protect.

 

I think that we would both agree that the detailed evidence will make for interesting reading.

[boots123]

from bodyline, cricket series, English captain knocks on the dressing room door of Aussie team, their captain opens the door, what can I do for you, english captain replies I wish to register a complaint, one of your men called me a bastard, aussie captain shouts back to his team, which one of you bastards called him a bastard, pretty much sums it up for me,it happens in all sports and walks of life, things said in the heat of the moment with no malice intended.:whatever:

[Randy Marsh]

What's certain is we'll have the top legal people we can get our hands on swarming all over this now, which bodes well given our legal form over the past 15months. The club statement suggested that not only a standard appeal could be considered. I think we will react very strongly to this, and it will turn out very very messy one way or another. Certainly don't believe it will end at the appeal stage anyway.

 

Let's face it, no way the FA will overturn the case now. They've worked so hard to stitch him up, they may reduce his ban by a couple of games but that's the best we will get off them. I can see this reaching the courts one way or another as we'll go as high as we can to clear his name.

[xerxes]

Reading Facebook and Twitter tonight, the damage is done. His reputation is in tatters now whatever happens, make no mistake about it. 99% of people outside of the club will not read our statement, will not know any details behind the case other than his guilty verdict. He is fucked now. We need to chant his name louder than ever tomorrow.

 

I agree that this is very uncomfortable territory we are now in.

 

Will others view such chanting as supporting a racist/racism? What happens when the travelling Kop boos and abuses Evra at OT, how will that play to a wider audience? It is not enough to say we are protecting our own, we may also be aggravating the initial offence in the eyes of others- with further adverse consequences.

 

In advance of the full evidence being published, I still believe that this is about linguistic/cultiral differences and that a great injustice is being played out here.

[xerxes]

What's certain is we'll have the top legal people we can get our hands on swarming all over this now, which bodes well given our legal form over the past 15months. The club statement suggested that not only a standard appeal could be considered. I think we will react very strongly to this, and it will turn out very very messy one way or another. Certainly don't believe it will end at the appeal stage anyway.

 

Let's face it, no way the FA will overturn the case now. They've worked so hard to stitch him up, they may reduce his ban by a couple of games but that's the best we will get off them. I can see this reaching the courts one way or another as we'll go as high as we can to clear his name.

 

More good stuff there.

 

I agree that FSG will be on the phone to Broughton to see who he recommends for this – the brand is under threat. FSG will also scrutinise Ayre’s response to date.

 

I don’t see that FSG have any alternative other than to wheel out the big guns for this, the possible downsides are more considerable than some are acknowledging ( Naming Right partners, sponsors, commercial deals, future signings).

 

I agree that the FA are likely to defend their original decision. Whether it is an eight or four game ban is irrelevant – this is about reputations, Luis’, Kenny’s , LFC’s and FSG’s.

 

The problem is that FA members agree to be bound by the rules of the FA, so the basis of any court action, in advance of the detailed judgement, is very difficult to determine.

[SCOUSE TAPAS]

Oh and san don an apology would be fine for the neg and the fucking bullshit remark you sent me.

 

As you can see you were totally wrong about the chelsea incident.

[boots123]

someone will correct me if i am wrong, but i heard that there is a man u shareholder on the board of the FA, surely a conflict of interests.

[WhiskeyJar]

Negrito:

 

Dictionary

noun adjective

boldface bold

[TheDrowningMan]

Reading Facebook and Twitter tonight, the damage is done. His reputation is in tatters now whatever happens, make no mistake about it. 99% of people outside of the club will not read our statement, will not know any details behind the case other than his guilty verdict. He is fucked now. We need to chant his name louder than ever tomorrow. I seriously think we should fuck off the FA Cup in protest. Make a worldwide statement, there's no way Liverpool Football Club would do that for a guilty man.

 

And watch as John Terry, subject to a different set of rules given that his investigation is criminal, is let off with nary a warning by the FA after it becomes clear that there's not enough to prosecute him.

 

Should that happen and he continues to get picked, ANYONE who supports the England team is essentially a racist. That's his native language, he knows the score, it couldn't have been intended in any other way and there is video evidence. I don't see how continuing to support England after that would be significantly different to voting BNP.

[TheResonator]

It is disgusting hypocrisy, looking at the shit Luis is getting.

 

Suarez seems to have admitted referring to Evra's colour during discussion. He could have said 'negro' or 'negrito' or any manner of things, and meant them without any pejorative intent whatsoever -- it wouldn't matter. Unfortunately, he's playing in a country in which if someone asked you: 'who's John?' and you answered: 'oh, you know, the tall, black guy' someone would be clipping you round the ear for acknowledging that you see colours.

 

That's basically the attitude of the British press, and if I put on my armchair psychology hat, I would say that the hysteria over racism comes from guilt rather than moralism. At the same time as accepting that migration is an essential part of moving our country forward, it is also emblematic of the decline of our empire, and their can doubtless have been some collective reluctance to share our land with people from other countries and continents. I would say that that is probably, in some ways, natural -- but it ought to be acknowledged and tempered with reason, rather than being repressed.

 

People are often the most outwardly violent towards the worst qualities that exist within themselves. It makes a lot of sense that an endemically racist country is so desperate to string up racists.

 

The great irony of the judgement is that it is more racist than the crime. It totally ignores the defendants culture, upbringing, and personal history. It is stringing him up as a racist in spite of his being from a culture in which the idea of racism probably connotes something completely different. Does the verdict show any understanding of cultural or linguistic nuances? No. Does it show any tolerance for those differences? No. So where is the morality in that?

 

If the FA were to actually take a leading role in this, the right thing to do would have been to say: 'look, we accept what you meant. Over here, we have a different set of expectations and a different attitude towards language. Please don't do it again.' I think it would have been their prerogative to do that, if there was evidence for him using language that they found unacceptable.

 

With the verdict having been delivered so sensationally, Suarez is going to carry this tag throughout his time here. It will be sung about at games, he'll get shit for it in the street, he'll be forever attracting snide digs from commentators and journalists... he'll be hounded out, basically, unless this is overturned. And I think, to be fair, that nobody in their right mind could blame him if he decided to leave that behind. I wouldn't wish the contradictory bile of the faux-moral fuckwits of England on anybody.

 

It is particularly vexing, though, seeing that punishment delivered on somebody who is alone in a foreign country and who has not had time to learn the language or understand accused of using a non-pejorative term spoken in a foreign language. Oh, brave England.

 

Thank god we are crucifying him to save the morality of our country.

 

Graham Taylor said that 'it's wholly acceptable in parts of the Middle East to cut the hands off of thieves - but we wouldn't tolerate it here.' If you look closely enough, Gordon, the only thing missing is the knife.

[TheDrowningMan]

It is disgusting hypocrisy, looking at the shit Luis is getting.

 

Suarez seems to have admitted referring to Evra's colour during discussion. He could have said 'negro' or 'negrito' or any manner of things, and meant them without any pejorative intent whatsoever -- it wouldn't matter. Unfortunately, he's playing in a country in which if someone asked you: 'who's John?' and you answered: 'oh, you know, the tall, black guy' someone would be clipping you round the ear for acknowledging that you see colours.

 

That's basically the attitude of the British press, and if I put on my armchair psychology hat, I would say that the hysteria over racism comes from guilt rather than moralism. At the same time as accepting that migration is an essential part of moving our country forward, it is also emblematic of the decline of our empire, and their can doubtless have been some collective reluctance to share our land with people from other countries and continents. I would say that that is probably, in some ways, natural -- but it ought to be acknowledged and tempered with reason, rather than being denied.

 

People are often the most outwardly violent towards the worst qualities that exist within themselves. It makes a lot of sense that an endemically racist country is so desperate to string up racists.

 

The great irony of the judgement is that it is more racist than the crime. It totally ignores the defendants culture, upbringing, and personal history. It is stringing him up as a racist in spite of his being from a culture in which the idea of racism probably connotes something completely different. Does the verdict show any understanding of cultural or linguistic nuances? No. Does it show any tolerance for those differences? No. So where is the morality in that?

 

If the FA were to actually take a leading role in this, the right thing to do would have been to say: 'look, we accept what you meant. Over here, we have a different set of expectations and a different attitude towards language. Please don't do it again.' I think it would have been their prerogative to do that, if there was evidence for him using language that they found unacceptable.

 

With the verdict having been delivered so sensationally, Suarez is going to carry this tag throughout his time here. It will be sung about at games, he'll get shit for it in the street, he'll be forever attracting snide digs from commentators and journalists... he'll be hounded out, basically, unless this is overturned. And I think, to be fair, that nobody in their right mind could blame him if he decided to leave that behind. I wouldn't wish the contradictory bile of the faux-moral fuckwits of England on anybody.

 

It is particularly vexing, though, seeing that punishment delivered on somebody who is alone in a foreign country and who has not had time to learn the language or understand accused of using a non-pejorative term spoken in a foreign language. Oh, brave England.

 

Thank god we are crucifying him to save the morality of our country.

 

Graham Taylor said that 'it's wholly acceptable in parts of the Middle East to cut the hands off of thieves - but we wouldn't tolerate it here.' But if you look closely enough, the only thing missing is the knife.

 

Great post.

 

I've spent plenty of time in the USA and for all the shit it gets, it's much, much easier to find areas relatively unencumbered by everyday bigotry. That is literally impossible in Britain no matter where you go. I'm sickened by this place and the sooner I'm able to leave again - this time with permanence - the better. It's an absolute dive of a country, one which flocks to the Mail and The Sun in droves while denying that it has issues.